General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums
Is Newtown Making Such News Because The Kids Are Mostly White?
On Wednesday night, my brother and I were talking on the phone. I am not sure which one of us said it first, but we both agreed that the news coverage for the Newtown massacre was only as intense as it was because most of the children murdered were white.
On Thursday, I heard Norm Goldman discussing this very issue, and it sent my mind racing.
In 1989, an armed man murdered 5 children and wounded 29 others at the Cleveland Elementary School in Stockton, California. The murderer was white, I won't name him and give him any glory, but there are dozens of pictures of him online.
The 5 murdered children, 1 little boy and 4 little girls, ranged in age from 6 to 9 years, and they were Cambodian and Vietnamese immigrants. I am a pretty skilled Internet sleuther, but it took me a while to find pictures of them in this YouTube video and still picture. Until today, I cannot EVER remember seeing the faces of these 5 murdered beautiful children shown anywhere.
Oeun Lim, Age 8
Ram Chun, Age 8
Rathanar Or, Age 9
Sokhim An, Age 6
Thuy Tran, Age 6
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland_School_massacre
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Skittles
(153,160 posts)and I say that as life-long blonde, blue-eyed gal......anyone who denies it is unable or unwilling to see the truth...it is sad and ugly but it is true
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)Please note that almost nothing has been said about the adults. Americans are very selective in our sympathies.
1) Young white girls
2) Young white boys
3) Asian children
4) Any other white people unless they were drunks or Darwin candidates
5) Any other children killed in a massacre by a white person who needed mental help
6) Innocent children killed in the crossfire of a gang shootout
7) Any other innocent non-whites
8) Any innocent civilians Americans kill in other countries.
Lionessa
(3,894 posts)the number of children killed, their ages, and their families, iirc, are upper middle class or higher.
JI7
(89,250 posts)there were a bunch of shootings after columbine with white victims.
this is getting more because they were so young. i remember during columbine nra and other similar types were actually saying students should be armed.
for the case you mention i don't know how much coverage it was for those times. i also read about a shooting in a mcdonalds around the mid 80s.
i think it's difficult to compare some things that happened before the media we have now to things that happen after.
tblue
(16,350 posts)I have been thinking that too. This is what it takes to get the critical mass needed to BEGIN the discussion. Lovely white children had to die in large numbers to get some people to finally say 'enough.' I was at that point a long long long time ago.
TheDebbieDee
(11,119 posts)That's why we must not only strike while the iron is hot, we must prevent the iron from cooling off and milk this tragedy for the good it can bring to the gun situation in this country.
We must not let those little ones have died in vain.
Bake
(21,977 posts)Did you REALLY just say that?
Bake
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)I think you could make a case for the viewpoint, yet the scope of the violence in and of itself brings vast attention. Life is rarely just one thing and I believe overall it would be difficult to draw that conclusion.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)The age of the children and the obvious heroism of the teachers being only two of those factors.
The fact that people can get around the media narrative online also makes for a difference in reactions, that wasn't happening in 1989.
exboyfil
(17,863 posts)You have four times as many people killed with this shooting, and the news cycle has changed substantially with four 24 hour cable news outlets and the internet. If the same thing happened in a mostly African-American community, you would see comparable coverage. I remember extensive coverage of Atlanta and Wayne Williams as well. The Sikh Temple also got a great deal of coverage.
Ivywoods55
(131 posts)coverage because in the beginning everyone thought it was a "white" man kidnapping and murdering those children, it wasn't because the children were Black. Also, those were "serial killer" murders, which back in the seventies was still comparatively few and far between in Black communities, especially where children being snatched were concerned. I do not understand why people become angry when race is given consideration in scenarios such as this when most honest American know and understand that this is still a very racist Nation, it has changed a tremendous lot, but there is still a tremendous amount of racism within these four borders. Did not the last election, and the last four years of racist-Obama-bashing, and recently the Rice fiasco, teach people anything, it should have.
Quantess
(27,630 posts)A black serial killer whose victims number up to 42 black women? Yeah, who cares.
Just try to imagine the uproar if a serial killer had preyed on (up to) 42 white men!
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)Quantess
(27,630 posts)GIANT FAIL on your part.
Thirties Child
(543 posts)What I remember is how horrible it was that someone was killing children. You dreaded turning on the news because another child was either missing or murdered.
qanda
(10,422 posts)I think this has more to do with the age of constant news and social media than any kind of racial bias. Also the number of children killed is just staggering and heart wrenching.
in 1989 there was no internet. It was a much different time.
pnwmom
(108,978 posts)Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)...it'd be dominating the news cycle about as much today.
The news cycle has changed a bit since '89; there's this whole intarwebz thing, for instance, plus the fact that the media latches on to any mass shooting that touches a school in the last decade or so. Missing White Blond Syndrome's very much a thing for individual cases, but mass events like this go just a bit beyond run of the mill crime.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)and made up of mostly poor brown people, so that's easier to ignore.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)shooting" before the new "worst mass shooting".
i don't know what the 'worst mass shooting' was, but just offhand:
April 16, 2007: Seung-Hui Cho, 23, kills 32 people and himself on the Virginia Tech campus in Blacksburg, Va.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)
txwhitedove
(3,928 posts)
RoverSuswade
(641 posts)I was in a college fraternity (all white) and we sat around and talked about what a senseless tragedy this was. It touched everybody's heart and fostered an attitude change in race relations.
obamanut2012
(26,076 posts)WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)enough. And then there are these posts- yours is not the only one.
First of all, I had heard of that terrible massacre in Stockton. I remember the coverage. It was all over the news- though of course, the news wasn't the saturation media it is today.
Secondly, 27 people were murdered in Newtown, 20 of them children. In a first grade class. Had this happened in poor urban school, there would have been, I believe, much the same kind of coverage. One of the reasons that Newtown looms so large is sheer numbers.
MrSlayer
(22,143 posts)If it had been a daycare center full of toddlers the outrage level would have been even higher, if it were high school seniors it would have been slightly less.
I don't think race has anything to do with it.
FSogol
(45,485 posts)I agree: I don't think race has anything to do with it.
lunatica
(53,410 posts)I've wondered the same myself, but I think what the media covers may be very different from what the general population thinks. I've seen ample proof that most Americans care about things that the media simply refuses to talk about. Hell! Just look at the elections we just had. The media made it into a horse race that it never was.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)
Cal Carpenter
(4,959 posts)There is no doubt (and plenty of research/evidence) that race is a factor in most news coverage, particularly in regard to violence.
To ask the question about this particular case is NOT race baiting.
Hundreds of years of systemic suppression of non-white people is the problem, not asking if or how it is relevant to a given situation.
I don't agree with the OP, however it is YOUR post that is terribly offensive, imo.
joeybee12
(56,177 posts)
Mr Dixon
(1,185 posts)
Justice
(7,188 posts)
gollygee
(22,336 posts)On one hand, we all know that when children go missing, it's the white ones - particularly pretty white girls - who get most of the news coverage. Some of that might be at play here.
On the other hand, there are a lot of differences between that shooting and this one, mainly the difference in how news works - how many news programs there are, how much competition they have for viewers, how much they sensationalize these kinds of stories, etc. The news/entertainment industry is a much bigger deal now than 1989. That's probably a huge difference in how they were treated too.
And then there's the size of it - just how many kids were killed.
So that might very well be a factor, but I think changes to the news/entertainment industry are probably an even bigger factor.
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)9...
8...
9...
I wonder why...
BeyondGeography
(39,374 posts)
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)
union_maid
(3,502 posts)I think there are a lot of factors involved. The ages of the children and the number of them is the number one thing. Just executing a whole classroom of little children is about as shocking a crime as there is. Another is that the nation has pretty much had it. These things are happening one after another, it seems and this was a tipping point in a way. I think another factor might be that the place - this little town in CT - seems like the epitome of safe places to be a raise a family and it's still a sad fact that a place like that is more likely to be mostly white than not. If the places that look like our idealized memories of a more innocent time aren't safe, then there might be a feeling that our backs are really against the wall now.
Ivywoods55
(131 posts)I so agree with your statement concerning the "where" it happened, and therein lies the problem. When will white people wake up to the fact that this type of violence can happen anywhere, at anytime, by anyone? After so many deaths by crazed individuals why are people still living in "that will never happen here" make-believe land? Why do people think that death to young children and teens only continues to happens in "those other people's" neighborhoods? This question baffles me after so many people, young and old, have died in places where "we never thought that would/could happen here"....why do white folks still think that way? I have made this statement for about five years now, ever since these type of shooting began to become so commonplace in "those other" neighborhoods, I say, "what affects my child will eventually affect most children, so why do people think that just because you move your child away from my child, what is affecting my child, my situation, will not eventually affect your child?" I hope this is a wake up call to all Americans concerned not just banning assault weapons because they feel as though these are the "weapons" of choice for individuals who want to "take out" large numbers of people, I pray that we begin to look at all forms of gun violence,because banning assault weapons may help for a while, but eventually handguns will also be the "weapon" of choice for anyone who wants to make himself/herself the topic of the day.
Ivywoods55
(131 posts)If it were just about how many children were killed, that many and more are killed in Chicago everyday and the media just shrugs if off as an everyday occurrence...they don't even care. It has been this way for the last three or four years, each year the death toll in Chicago has been over three hundred or close to it, and no one has given a browny-chit about how old they were or how many died, especially not the MSM....now tell me again it is not about what color the children were, or that it does not make any difference that the children were white....as to the screams for more gun control, Black children die on a second-by-second basis somewhere in the U.S. from gun violence, have been for decades, where has the raised voices calling for more severe gun control been? Mostly SILENT! Until now. I am not begrudging the outcries for more gun control, because whatever happens may help save hundreds of thousands of "children's lives" no matter the color, but let's not pretend that the color, age, and background did not form a perfect image for the white MSM to pick up and carry this story....because all of these things did, and always will. My heart aches for any parent that loses a child, I have been there, I know the pain, the hurt and the anger of losing a child because someone else was experiencing problems with, and in, his own private world, and a gun was easily available for him to use, so this issue is personal to me. Any coverage on this issue is good coverage, but is it "fair" coverage to other, far more browner children who die from and because of the same reasons, that should be the question. Thank you.
Mr Dixon
(1,185 posts)Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)Bullshit. And bullshit.
Your crime stats have more than 7000 children murdered in Chicago this year? Link?
This thread is disgusting enough without fabricating facts.
Ivywoods55
(131 posts)There are many children KILLED in Chicago everyday. GUNNED DOWN! Maybe if they were not Black you would know about them, huh? Each year, for at least the last three years, the MURDER RATE IN CHICAGO HAS BEEN HIGH, it is too bad so many people have had their heads in the sand, because NO one pays attention to little Black and brown children being killed by and with guns...I said it, with NO disrespect meant for the loss lives of the beautiful children in Newtown, but yes, it's true, and I meant it.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Really? Are you absolutely certain of that?
Ivywoods55
(131 posts)It should not matter if it is five or twenty-five, the murder rate in Chicago for young people, IS HIGH. Just the way some of you folks have answered to my post confirmed how tone deal to the loss lives of little black and brown children you are. Instead of jumping all over me because I made the comment, why did you not go and do the research? As if I would lie about the deaths of any children. This just goes to show just how much racism is prevalent, and how little some white people know about what goes on in some inner cities. Chicago's children have been besieged by gun violence for a while now...may not be twenty a day, but it is at least twenty to thirty a month, because it ends up being two to three hundred a year. How was and, or is that bringing RACE into a post, and why should it matter, if any attention had been paid to the loss lives of these parents kids....does not the life of every child matter? The color does not matter in the end, just the fact that these children's deaths, BY GUN VIOLENCE, SOME AS YOUNG AS FOUR YEARS OLD, WERE AND ARE IGNORED. Become angry at my post, but I stand by what I wrote, no matter who doesn't like it.
ProfessorGAC
(65,042 posts)And i read the Chicago papers EVERY DAY. I only live 50 miles from downtown Chicago. I watch Chicago news, listen to Chicago news on the radio and read the Chicago area news.
You made your numbers up. When you got called on it you changed the definition to "5 to 25", and even with that convenient and intellectually lazy dodge, it still doesn't come to 20 dead young folks per day. In fact, you're "estimate" is off by more than half order of magnitude.
I understand the OP's question, i don't agree with it, but i'm not making things up to support my POV.
You are.
Ivywoods55
(131 posts)dies per day, in twenty days Newtown's death total was/is/has been reached. As I said before "do the research" there have been over twenty children killed in Chicago this year and HEII no the media has not, has never covered the gun deaths of Black and minority children as they do white children. I STAND BY MY STATEMENT, whether you or anyone else on this thread agrees or not. There has been more children/young people killed this year in a city close to me in Youngstown, Ohio, bodies found in cars, in houses, on the street, a young child shot while sleeping in his bed, so to you and the MSM these deaths do not matter because they were not shot in a classroom with nineteen other children, their stories are less important, their lives/their deaths are less important because they did not die in a "good neighborhood" in a classroom filled with other children...flawed logic. I understand your reasoning though. As I stated before "do the research".
rainlillie
(1,095 posts)the difference.
Ivywoods55
(131 posts)Should where children lose their lives matter, if they are children, some as young as four or five? What should "where" matter if these children are DYING SO YOUNG? Some white people will bring anything into the conversation to justify ignoring the death and gun problem in inner city neighborhoods. NO CHILD SHOULD BE AT RISK FROM DYING FROM GUN VIOLENCE, especially since/when Black parents are not taking their children to gun shows buying up guns, nor are most teaching their children how to use assault rifles/guns. These children may not die in their classrooms, but just because they do not die in a classroom,should that make a difference that they were MURDERED? If someone's INNOCENT young child dies on a subway, standing on a street corner "walking to or from SCHOOL", or shot while sleeping in his or her bed, does that make their lives any less important than those killed in a classroom? I know this Nation has a very hard time dealing with race, but for anyone, and I mean ANYONE, to think that just because I stated young Black and brown children die from guns everyday, I am bringing race into this conversation, I say pull your head out, get informed, and stop believing that just because Black children do not DIE in a group, their lives do not matter any less.
vaberella
(24,634 posts)However, how is it that innocent children being killed makes any difference. The common denominator is that they are innocents who are killed by guns. In the end...there is no difference and I think the fact we make it or consider it a difference is what leads to this idea that Blacks or some people may be "race-baiting" when they mention the probable racial aspect. This does go on in Chicago and Detroit on a daily basis but it is rarely given national news and this is more than one child in an area at times. The point being that it could be 1 or 20---it doesn't matter. Children shouldn't be murdered by guns.
Lurker Deluxe
(1,036 posts)Saying this was about race is what makes things that are about race have no meaning.
And, 20 kids a day killed in Chi-town. That's so far from reality it isn't even amusing.
In 2011 there were 433 homicides in Chicago - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Chicago
In order for what you claim to be even, hell it isn't, close to true there would have to be 6,800 unreported child killings in the middle of the USofA. I can not find any stats for 6 year olds being shot on the mean streets of Chicago, but I would be willing to bet that in the coarse of a year it is less than 10.
Ivywoods55
(131 posts)Children, at even a rate of two per day are dying, are their lives any less important than those children who died in that classroom? I did not say twenty children die each day in Chicago, what I said was "hundreds of INNOCENT" children die in Chicago each year from gun violence, and NO ONE CARES, and that is a FACT. And how do I know that no one cares, just take a look at the comments on this thread since I posted my comment, especially those who replied to my comment. These folks are more concerned with what I said about HOW MANY Black children DIED, and how I made my statement, more so than they are concerned about the FACT that these children are DYING, at a much higher rate than the children who died in Newtown. There was a time when Black children were dying in schools in inner cities, that was when these school became filled with alarms and security systems, and POLICE officers, because no one wanted to talk about gun control, or banning assault rifles. Can or do you remember any of that?
Nikia
(11,411 posts)Most of the murdered are adults and teenagers. Many of the teenagers that are murdered are not so innocent in that they are involved in crime. That is not to say that the teenagers deserved to die but they were involved in activities that put them at an increased chance of being murdered and make other people less sympathetic towards them.
Having security and police in schools has been effective in preventing murders, less severe violence, and criminal activity in general. Teachers and most students feel safer because they are safer. Many of the murders engage in other illegal activity so obtaining illegal guns wouldn't be much of an issue.
Gang violence is an issue, but everyone knows that gangs are dangerous and that it is safer to not get involved in them. It may be in some neighborhoods that young people are pressured to join gangs, even to the point that their life is at stake. Sometimes, innocent bystanders do get killed as well. There are some groups working to address that issue, but I don't know if there is an easy answer.
Ivywoods55
(131 posts)because they are Black. Most of the children who have been murdered in Chicago were not gang members, and most of these were teenagers and younger...do the research and please stop spreading the falsehoods and distortions most people believe about children of color. Most Black and brown children are not in gangs, especially young black girls and children, which many of these children that were murdered in Chicago were. I find your comment humorous, because some folks like you like to stereotype Black youth into categories and label them when they are killed or murdered, but you will defend to the end any white youth, paint them as being "mentally unstable" when they kill...I wonder why it never crosses the mind of labelers that just maybe the black youth, born into poverty, poor school systems, and many times one parent homes, with many odds of being successful in life against them, why they are NEVER considered to be "mentally unstable" when they kill...hmmm I guess this is just one of those things that make you go, hmmm?
Nikia
(11,411 posts)but see this article http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-07-12/news/ct-met-chicago-homicide-demographics-20120712_1_homicide-victims-homicide-numbers-police-data
Being in a gang is trouble. It is unfortunate that some decent kids end up in them and more tragic when innocent people fall victim to them. Most of the time, though, they don't target small children. They aren't a bunch of psychopathetic killers like Lanza. Some are troubled of course, but I think that gang violence has a lot to do do with a hypermasculine warrior mentality.
I know that having no hope often brings out the worst in people. That is true of all people everywhere. With inequality, it happens more and more.
What do you suggest?
uponit7771
(90,339 posts)...the subject.
Conservatives hate facts, we should be far removed from that mindset
Recursion
(56,582 posts)And they blame it on Marilyn and the heroin
Where were the parents at?
Look at where it's at: middle America
Now it's a tragedy
Now it's so sad to see
An upper class city having this happening
There's been some head-scratching about "why do white and Asian men go on random spree-killings?" but when non-white, non-Asian men go on spree killings we call them something else (terrorism, gang-banging, what have you), so there may be something to what you're saying.
Confusious
(8,317 posts)In California, measures were taken to first define and then ban assault weapons, resulting in the Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989. On the Federal level, Congress struggled with a way to ban weapons like Purdy's aesthetically military-style rifle without being seen to also ban more sporting-looking rifles. Later in 1989, President George H. W. Bush signed an executive order (the Semi-Automatic Assault Rifle Ban) banning importation of assault weapons. The Federal assault weapons ban was enacted in 1994, and expired in 2004. President Bill Clinton signed another executive order in 1994 which banned importation of most firearms and ammunition from China.[16]
You got a republican to ban importation of assult weapons because of this action.
Try harder next time, k?
Ps. I was 18 at the time. I remember it being on all the news shows, a very big deal pre-Internet pre-24 hour cable news.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)It seems to me that a single killing recently of just one African-American kid dominated every discussion everywhere for weeks.
Trayvon Martin ring a bell?
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)I mean, he must have been, or else the media would have ignored him.
uponit7771
(90,339 posts)rainlillie
(1,095 posts)like Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)This is crap. Pure crap.
rainlillie
(1,095 posts)That's just a fact.
"Notably, many of the national media figures who initially devoted time to the shooting are black, which some journalists and advocacy groups say attests to the need for diversity in newsrooms."
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/26/business/media/for-martins-case-a-long-route-to-national-attention.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)I would be just another stupid white boy being led around by the mainstream media and wallowing in my own ignorance.
rainlillie
(1,095 posts)Ivywoods55
(131 posts)And none of it is pretty concerning the lives of minority children in America where gun violence and dying is concerned. Why are white people becoming angry over the truth? I am not saying the outpouring of sympathy and compassion from many Americans would not have been the same if these children had been Black or Brown, what I am saying, and truly believe is that the media coverage, and the outcry for far more gun control would not, because it has never been, the same when/if Black or brown children die from violence. Does it matter what type of guns are killing children? Should it or would it matter, if the gunman who committed these vicious murders in Newtown had had a series of handguns or if there had been more than one murderer using handguns? I believe that the outcry would be the same, that banning some forms of handguns would be the outcry, even though there have been hundreds of handgun deaths in the inner city schools in the past, with no outcry for the laws that apply to handguns to change or be revised. That is my opinion, and as a person who lives close to a city that has Black-on-Black handgun violence almost everyday I witness this up close, and because I have loss a son to gun violence, I have also lived it.
I remember reading about it here, on Facebook, at DKos, and multiple other places long before Sharpton and Jackson ever got involved.
Bad Thoughts
(2,524 posts)I don't think there would be such a broad condemnation of the NRA and gun rights lobbies at this time had not AA protesters questioned the legitimacy of the stand your ground law months ago.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)It's a matter of class more than race. This happened in one of those little enclaves where TV talking heads might live and it scared the bejeezus out of them. When they can envision their teenage nerd neighbor going apeshit and shooting up their kid's school it becomes very personal.
I don't want to sound like a Bolshevik but the victims of this terrible tragedy were a lot like the kids of the TV pundits who've been talking about it for a week.
Plus the fact that it happened at Christmas makes the whole thing even sadder. And them talking heads loves the sad.
I heard yesterday that the residents of Newtown are ready to tar and feather a few reporters. And who could blame them?
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)infact the obscene nature of over covering this infuriates me, it's not about the victims at all no matter how many memorials, moments of silence, half staff flags, letting them mourn and leaving them a lone would be the greatest show of compassion.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)I believe there is more truth to that claim than this particular incident. I do think all the Newtown coverage is bordering on obscene and I have tuned out all news on the matter. I heard once that the quickest way to forget something was to make a memorial to it.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)FSogol
(45,485 posts) rainlillie
(1,095 posts)I think if this happen at a school with mostly non-white elementary kids, the nation would have the same reaction. It just rips your heart out to think that the most innocent among us are not even safe at school. I do see your point, considering that when kids of color go missing or women of color it's never get's the same coverage.
Brickbat
(19,339 posts)and I think a lot of the general public could look at those incidents and say, wow, what a terrible thing to do -- but who didn't have a fleeting thought of some kind of revenge fantasy in high school? We never would have done it, and maybe didn't even think about taking a gun to school, but we could understand the thinking, if only for a second.
But a first-grade class? I got nothing.
ETA: Also, news coverage is very different now. In 1989, with three networks and a couple of cable news outlets, you had to sit in front of your TV at home to get information about the shootings. With the Internet, smart phones and TVs at every restaurant, we get a lot more news throughout the day, and more news outlets are digging into the stories, trying to feed the beast with profiles of every victim.
I kind of regret answering your question seriously, but you caught me before my coffee.
Jennicut
(25,415 posts)I would be just as devastated. It's Connecticut to me no matter what town or city it was. The state I was born in and have lived in my entire life. It sucks. It hurts. The kids that died are a year younger then my youngest daughter. If they were an African american child, Asian, Hispanic, it would hurt too. Gun violence hurts the cities here in CT as well, especially Hartford. It gets lots of local coverage.
spanone
(135,836 posts)
Auntie Bush
(17,528 posts)still_one
(92,190 posts)the OPs post has very little correlation in my view
This issue has nothing to do with race, it has to do with military weapons, with high capacity magazines in the hands of unstable people
JohLast
(81 posts)Don't play into their hands!
budkin
(6,703 posts)still_one
(92,190 posts)That was over a decade ago
The shootings at Columbine or Virginia Tech did not lead to the same results
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)We're up to 8 children A DAY killed by guns in America. Hopefully the gun $eller$ will stop spamming the internet with their agenda and the laws will be changed to slow down this madness.
treestar
(82,383 posts)No, probably. I had not heard of the 1989 shooting.
IMO had it been a mostly black school, it might get coverage, but it would be different in tone. If the shooter were black too there would definitely be a lot of blaming of the "culture of dependency" and "lack of male role models" blah blah blah blah the rest of their code, even if it were a prosperous black neighborhood. Which is inexcusable, but the media generally is.
renate
(13,776 posts)It was raised many times here in relation to the Natalie Holloway case, for example.
I think everybody would be equally horrified by a mass shooting of any children, regardless of socioeconomic class or race, but whether we would be hearing calls of "Something must be done" to this extent... no, I don't think so.
If this had occurred in a high-crime area--whether in a predominately black, brown, or white part of town--I think the MSM's story would be that it's terrible that there are high-crime areas where little children can be massacred in school. In other words, the focus would be on the local culture and not on guns themselves, or even on mental illness, and for people who don't live in those areas, it would still come under the heading of "Terrible Things That Happen to Other People."
In the case of Newtown, people who are fortunate to live lives mostly untouched by violent crime were suddenly made to realize that nobody, anywhere, is safe, and worse than that, neither are our children. And I think that (as well as the fact that these were little first-graders) is what has really gotten into our DNA in this case.
I appreciate your raising the question.
Ivywoods55
(131 posts)Class, race, location, and reason....none of these can be dismissed because all are important as to why some situations receive attention, and other do not.
Comrade_McKenzie
(2,526 posts)The only victims were those 27 people.
Sick of the woe is me garbage about race when 20 children are dead.
JohLast
(81 posts)uponit7771
(90,339 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)But I do believe that the coverage would be different.
vaberella
(24,634 posts)Oh this doesn't happen..."It happens in other places." or "You hear that happen in other places but not our town." This idea that else where, could be Detroit that little 6 and 7 year olds are killed. While in that little town they only have peace and serenity. The media's attention is also projecting all this.
cali
(114,904 posts)one of the more common ones. Furthermore, had this happened in a classroom in Detroit with all poor minority children, the reaction would have been the same. It was the primal horror that someone strolled in and killed so many small children at once.
Quantess
(27,630 posts)I can guarantee you, the media would have all but stopped talking about it after 2 days.
cali
(114,904 posts)Go back 25 years to the Stockton school murders and you'll find that did not disappear from the media after 2 days.
Quantess
(27,630 posts)Obviously I can't guarantee your money back. I'm not trying to "win" an argument, either.
I don't know... you seem defensive. I'm white, with fair complexion. I got insulted on Natalee Holloway's behalf when everyone started ripping on the victim, just because she was young and blonde. Her murder was worth some attention, however, other young female murder victims don't often get so much media attention, and it truly is worth asking, why not?
Some stories generate media attention, some don't. Some stories awaken the public interest, some don't. It just is that way. Don't try to deny it.
vaberella
(24,634 posts)Maybe it's because I live in Harlem. That would never cross my mind to say because many mother's have lost their babies to hand guns. Please don't apologize for this with such a weak statement of "it's natural reaction." Not in my world. Maybe it's a natural reaction in that kind of world...where things like that doesn't happen in their world.
cali
(114,904 posts)you're perpetrating this ugly lie about racism in this case. It would behoove you to educate yourself. Read this and maybe you'll get a clue.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/in-the-toll-of-gun-violence-on-children-newtown-remains-an-anomaly/2012/12/23/e00ee74c-4892-11e2-820e-17eefac2f939_story.html
The OP is vile.
vaberella
(24,634 posts)But believe it all you want. A natural reaction would be to flinch if you touch something hot. Or to trip if you foot hits an unexpected bump. It is not a natural reaction to state---"This doesn't happen in my places like....it happens to other people." What is this other place that makes this okay? To you it's vile...to me it raises a question. In what part of the world is losing a baby normalized?
So no it's not a natural reaction. I don't understand what your link is supposed to mean in relation to what the discussion is about. There is nothing vile about the OP's post. It raises a rather interesting question. Why has there yet been a national outrage to stop the NRA BEFORE this horrific incident? Children being killed in gun violence is not an anomaly.
uponit7771
(90,339 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)I live in a poor rural area and I'd say the same thing. It's a natural reaction to something of this magnitude. Furthermore, I haven't seen any attributed quotes saying that- though I'm sure it was said. After all, it really is a natural reaction.
Quantess
(27,630 posts)I posted this link on GD at the same time, and it got hardly any attention. I got irritated at the lack of response, or even rec's for chrisssake.
Can you imagine the uproar if the victims were white males?
Edit to add: the serial killer is himself black. So that's another "meh, so what" factor.
vaberella
(24,634 posts)Quantess
(27,630 posts)Okay, I get that there is the protective attitude toward women being victims of serial killers. But serial killers usually prey on women, anyway, so it's not a surprise. I would think that white male victims would get a double take and extra uproar.
There was Jeffrey Dahmer, and he stands out for many reasons, one of which is that his victims were male. He liked men of all races, from what I understand. They were gay, and they mostly consented to go home with him, though.
But what if the victims were all straight white males who were ambushed? So in that case, any white male could be the next potential victim? That would send a chill through the public's psyche.
Just some speculation.
Iggy
(1,418 posts)given the carnage in Chicago over the summer.. with several weekends with dozens of people shot. in August, looks like the number of gun deaths was 50 or more, breaking the previous year's record for that month.
almost all the people involved are black, and I suspect most people outside of Chicago think the victims are ALL "gang bangers" and deserve to die-- false, but that's what people believe.
With the Sandy Hook Elementary slaughter, I think it's the straw that broke the camel's back-- twenty helpless, innocent children in their SCHOOL.
I'm not sure why people didn't react the same with the recent slaughter in the Aurora movie theater; perhaps people thought "that's what you get for going to a midnight movie".
http://chicagoist.com/2012/08/21/saturday_murders_in_chicago_tie_201.php
WCGreen
(45,558 posts)It happened close in to the holidays. It came right after a contentious National Election. It was 20 kids and six adults.
You can blanket any event with racism, but please take a moment to look at ALL the reasons.
NYC Liberal
(20,136 posts)It's not that this one is being given too much attention; it's that the others are given too little.
IMO every massacre should be given as much press as this one.
dogknob
(2,431 posts)
Tab
(11,093 posts)1) Children were 6 and 7 and in first grade. This is about as innocent as you get.
2) There were TWENTY of them. TWENTY!
3) Parents lived in a nice community, expected it a safe place to raise their kids.
4) Community was small - most people were affected. Not a city of 11 million or anything.
5) Parents sent kids off to school, expecting them to return.
6) It was not a place known for gun violence, drugs, or other lower-end cases of society.
I will agree that being a blond-hair, blue-eyed, victim "helps" the cause and the coverage, but also consider the contradiction - gun nuts face much more pushback now because of exactly that, rather than the victims being poor minorities. The very white NRA member is not confronted with a "minority" being slaughtered, but rather their own "kind". The minority voters, I'm sure, have had it up to here with gun violence and now white middle-class America has had it too. It has now officially cut across all spectrums, and people are fed up.
So, you are right in part, but I would argue wrong in part, in that there's more to it than just the racial makeup.
underthematrix
(5,811 posts)they were babies, 6 and 7 year old babies. I'm totally heart broken because they were just babies.
DollarBillHines
(1,922 posts)The ages of the children, the women, the mother, the timing.
The fact that Newtown is solid red and the avg household income exceeds $110,000 says a lot to suburban folks.
alp227
(32,025 posts)DollarBillHines
(1,922 posts)From Wiki:
It includes the towns of Avon, Bethel, Bethlehem, Bridgewater, Brookfield, Burlington, Canaan, Canton, Cheshire, Cornwall, Danbury, Farmington, Goshen, Harwinton, Kent, Litchfield, Meriden, Middlebury, Morris, New Britain, New Fairfield, New Milford, Newtown, Norfolk, North Canaan, Plainville, Plymouth, Roxbury, Salisbury, Sharon, Sherman, Simsbury, Southbury, Thomaston, Torrington (part), Warren, Washington, Waterbury (part), Watertown, Wolcott, and Woodbury, traditionally the most conservative part of Connecticut.
There is a difference between a town of 27,000 people and a District of 320,000 active voters.
I have a friend who grew up in Newtown and couldn't wait to get out. Unfortunately, his wife went all a'swoon over Newtown and demanded they move back there to raise their kids. He tells me that he is coming back here, that Newtown is tight-assed and solid red.
He writes for the local paper and says that politics prevails over facts during editorial meetings.
I wasn't just making shit up, I got that info from a very solid source.
MichiganVote
(21,086 posts)
life long demo
(1,113 posts)That does not lessen any death of any child anywhere.
madinmaryland
(64,933 posts)limited to the broadcast channels and several cable news channels. No cellphones for instant new alerts, so it would be a few hours that people would hear of things happening. No 24x7 news access.
In 1986, if I had not gone out at lunch, I would probably not heard of the Shuttle disaster until I got home and turned the TV on.
Edited to add: I have no idea how the tragedy you listed would have played in today's media.
Mdterp01
(144 posts)But anyone downplaying race being a factor must not pay attention to news much. Same thing with kidnappings. Blonde hair, blue eyed children who go missing get way more media coverage so much so that an organization had to be created to bring attention when people of color go missing. I was so sick of hearing about Natalee Holloways disappearance. I mean why did she get so much press coverage?? Aha yes..blonde and white.
WiffenPoof
(2,404 posts)Normally I would say yes. There is a long history of the Press ignoring the deaths of young AA. However, I have to say that had these children been African American, I don't think it would have made a difference. Only because it was so horrific that it transcended race. I just can't imagine the Press or the American people not giving this the attention it deserved regardless of race. Maybe I just want to have more faith in us as a society.
Paige
thucythucy
(8,052 posts)but that photograph of those coffins is heart-rending.
When will this ever end?
doc03
(35,338 posts)
Zorra
(27,670 posts)in a school?
ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)If you want to make that claim then find a more recent example.
valerief
(53,235 posts)agent46
(1,262 posts)I'm not embracing the "Special American Tragedy" bullshit. Our government murders innocents everyday, on our dime in our name. The dead just aren't our kids, so somehow that's different. This kind of cognitive dissonance is what makes people crazy - being lied to constantly at every turn by entrenched corporate and political assholes who want only to extract money from our pockets. I’m not going along with the drama. Not this time.